-
Articles/Ads
Article MEDICAL FEES—LIFE ASSURANCE . ← Page 3 of 4 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Medical Fees—Life Assurance .
Come we next to the serjeant-surgeon himself , whose letter requires no particular comment from us ; however , a " sexagenarian" has entered the lists against the serjeant-surgeon , and thus at present stands the affair—let the profession judge :
To the Editor of the City of London Trade Protection Circular . 2 , Royal Exchange Buildings , Nov . 24 , 1848 . Sir , —I have obtained permission from R . Keate , Esq ., F . R . S ., Serjeant-Surgeon to the Queen , to send , for insertion in your valuable journal , a letter addressed to me in Alay last , on the subject of medical fees to private referees of Assurers . As this question is now much discussed in Life Offices , the publication of the letter may assist the profession in arriving at some uniformity of practice . I am , & c . G . J . FARRANCE .
11 , Hertford Street , May fair , May 30 , 1848 . My dear Sir , —Before I ever thought of being connected with any Assurance Company , and indeed throughout my professional life , I have never considered that I had a right to look to such company for my fee on giving a metlical opinion , as the private referee of any friend wishing to assure his life . I have thought , ancl I still think , that the friend who refers the office to me , ought to pay my fee just as much as if he came himself to consult ine . Sometimes this has been clonemore frequentl
, y it is incorrectly omitted . It appears to me that if a medical man refuses to give an opinion of his patient , when he is pointed out by the patient to the Assurance Office , aud is not selected by or known to the office , unless the office pays him a fee ; the simple plan for the office to pursue would be to write to the proposer , and say that his Assurance cannot be effected , or that his proposal cannot be entertained , because his medical referee refuses to give any statement of his healthancl thus leave the
, matter to be settled between the proposer and his medical friend . The office pays its own medical advisers , and I cannot see wh y it should also pay the medical adviser of the person wishing to insure ; in fact , nine times out of ten , a medical referee is hardly necessary , although sometimes his answers do certainl y lead to the formation of an important opinion . I have often thought , and am still inclined to think , that the double ordeal is hardly necessary , —and I doubt whether the Equitable
does not get better opinions on the whole , by their mode of asking the report of medical referees , than other offices who ask a long string of questions , the generality of which are answered ' ¦ 'Not to my knowledge : " —but I have no business to dilate on this point . All this is independent of any legal objection , although I believe it is a matter of notoriety that the late Sir AVilliam Follett gave a very decided opinion that legal objections clo exist . Very faithfully yours ,
R . KEATE . To G . J . Farrance , Esq ., Actuary , City of Loudon Life Assurance Society . To the Editor ofthe City of London Trade Protection Circular . Sir , —The Actuary of the " City of London Life Assurance Society " seems to me to be mistaken in the tenor of Mr . Keate ' s letter , as inserted in your last number , cr he would not have placed such letter prominently
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Medical Fees—Life Assurance .
Come we next to the serjeant-surgeon himself , whose letter requires no particular comment from us ; however , a " sexagenarian" has entered the lists against the serjeant-surgeon , and thus at present stands the affair—let the profession judge :
To the Editor of the City of London Trade Protection Circular . 2 , Royal Exchange Buildings , Nov . 24 , 1848 . Sir , —I have obtained permission from R . Keate , Esq ., F . R . S ., Serjeant-Surgeon to the Queen , to send , for insertion in your valuable journal , a letter addressed to me in Alay last , on the subject of medical fees to private referees of Assurers . As this question is now much discussed in Life Offices , the publication of the letter may assist the profession in arriving at some uniformity of practice . I am , & c . G . J . FARRANCE .
11 , Hertford Street , May fair , May 30 , 1848 . My dear Sir , —Before I ever thought of being connected with any Assurance Company , and indeed throughout my professional life , I have never considered that I had a right to look to such company for my fee on giving a metlical opinion , as the private referee of any friend wishing to assure his life . I have thought , ancl I still think , that the friend who refers the office to me , ought to pay my fee just as much as if he came himself to consult ine . Sometimes this has been clonemore frequentl
, y it is incorrectly omitted . It appears to me that if a medical man refuses to give an opinion of his patient , when he is pointed out by the patient to the Assurance Office , aud is not selected by or known to the office , unless the office pays him a fee ; the simple plan for the office to pursue would be to write to the proposer , and say that his Assurance cannot be effected , or that his proposal cannot be entertained , because his medical referee refuses to give any statement of his healthancl thus leave the
, matter to be settled between the proposer and his medical friend . The office pays its own medical advisers , and I cannot see wh y it should also pay the medical adviser of the person wishing to insure ; in fact , nine times out of ten , a medical referee is hardly necessary , although sometimes his answers do certainl y lead to the formation of an important opinion . I have often thought , and am still inclined to think , that the double ordeal is hardly necessary , —and I doubt whether the Equitable
does not get better opinions on the whole , by their mode of asking the report of medical referees , than other offices who ask a long string of questions , the generality of which are answered ' ¦ 'Not to my knowledge : " —but I have no business to dilate on this point . All this is independent of any legal objection , although I believe it is a matter of notoriety that the late Sir AVilliam Follett gave a very decided opinion that legal objections clo exist . Very faithfully yours ,
R . KEATE . To G . J . Farrance , Esq ., Actuary , City of Loudon Life Assurance Society . To the Editor ofthe City of London Trade Protection Circular . Sir , —The Actuary of the " City of London Life Assurance Society " seems to me to be mistaken in the tenor of Mr . Keate ' s letter , as inserted in your last number , cr he would not have placed such letter prominently